Resolution of Inflammation Following Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis Is Associated with New Bone Formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) a vertebral corner inflammatory lesion (CIL) visible on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that completely resolves following treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) agents is more likely to develop into a de novo syndesmophyte visible on a radiograph as compared to a vertebral corner with no CIL. METHODS: Fifty patients with AS, who had MRI at baseline and at followup (mean 19.2 months), and spinal radiography at baseline and after 2 years, were followed prospectively. A persistent CIL was defined as being present on both MRI, while a resolved CIL was defined as present at baseline MRI and completely disappeared at followup MRI. Two readers read the MRI independently, and analyses were done for areas with agreement (concordant reads) and for individual reads. RESULTS: For patients receiving anti-TNF therapy (n = 23), new syndesmophytes developed more frequently from vertebral corners where a CIL had completely resolved on followup MRI (42.9% on concordant reads) as compared to vertebral corners where no CIL was demonstrable on either the baseline or followup MRI (2.4%; p < 0.0001). Results from individual readers showed similar differences. For patients receiving standard treatment (n = 27), the same pattern, although nonsignificant, was observed (20% vs 3.3%; p = 0.16) on concordant reads, as well as on individual reads. CONCLUSION: Our study of AS spines documents that MRI findings predict new bone formation on radiograph. Demonstration of an increased likelihood of developing new bone following resolution of inflammation after anti-TNF therapy supports the theory that TNF-α acts as a brake on new bone formation. Because the number of new syndesmophytes was low, further study is necessary to make firm conclusions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".